Re: upgrade of file(1) to 4.10 (including FreeBSD elf(5) fixes)

On Mon, Aug 02, 2004 at 07:59:14AM -0500, Jon Noack wrote:
> On 08/02/04 07:15, Oliver Eikemeier wrote:
> >I've prepared an upgrade to file-4.10 at:
> >  <http://people.freebsd.org/~eik/patches/fileup.shar>
> >This fixes
> >  PR bin/63830: [patch] file(1) doesn't recognize FreeBSD 5.x 
> >executables properly
> >
> >and an MFC will fix the problems of FreeBSD 4.10 being identified as 
> >4.9.1. I'll do some more testing (GCC 3.4) and think we should commit 
> >this before the 5.3 src freeze, especially since it has been discussed 
> >over a month ago:
> >  <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current/2004-June/thread.html#30172>
> 
> *sigh*  Why does Christos Zoulas ignore me?  He keeps telling me he'll 
> include my patch and then includes someone else's that doesn't fix the 
> problems.  In any case, my patch (against file 4.09) to fix the versioning:
> http://www.noacks.org/freebsd/readelf.c.diff
> 
> I made a test program to compare the output.  Here's the way things 
> would look with file 4.10:
> http://www.noacks.org/freebsd/output-4.10.txt

This is getting really redicious.  Edwin Groothuis <edwin_at_mavetju.org>
should have never have submitted a patch that hardcoded -CURRENT in 4.08
and -STABLE in 4.10.  And we don't have offical "revisions" (nor
patchlevels, other than security branches), so that output is bad also.

The only reasonable thing that doesn't have us chasing this all over the
place is to print out the FreeBSD major version (and MAYBE the minor
versoin) and leave it at that.  The "FreeBSD" section of file(1)'s
readelf.c has gotten beyond control.

> few months when 5.x goes -STABLE and 6.x appears.  Better not to print 
> branch names at all (for dev branches I just print the whole version 
> value in parentheses).  There are other minor nits like 5.0.4 and 4.15.30...
> 
> Here's the output of my patch:
> http://www.noacks.org/freebsd/output.txt

This output is mostly OK -- but I would drop the __FreeBSD_version.  I
can't see how knowing that helps anyone.  If it is insisted on keeping
it, it should be printed out consistently for *all* __FreeBSD_verions,
not just some.

-- 
-- David    (obrien_at_FreeBSD.org)